![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/yalpertem.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/emmanuel-levinas-maurice-blanchot-%C3%BCst%C3%BCne.jpg?resize=275%2C386\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
”<\/p>\n
\u0130fadenin gelip d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceye eklenmemesi, onun -metaforun- bu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclen teman\u0131n \u00f6tesine ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131; -hala bir \u00e7eki\u00e7 ya da bir belge gibi aktar\u0131labilir olan- bu teman\u0131n \u00f6tesinde, harflerin -a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131p serpilmeleri i\u00e7inde, edebiyatlar\u0131 i\u00e7inde- S\u00f6ylenenin spermsi nedenlerini korumas\u0131 ve yorumcuya, yani okuyucuya daha uzak ve daha eski ya da daha derin bir anlam\u0131, esinli bir anlam\u0131 vadetmesi -bu, ku\u015fkusuz, Anla\u015f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n bizzat kendisidir. Kendili\u011finden (de soi<\/em>) -ve sadece sonlu bir zihin i\u00e7in de\u011fil-, anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131rl\u0131k yazarlar ve okuyucular talep eder, kendili\u011finden Kitap talep eder.<\/p>\n Bu okuma -veya bu yorumlama- \u00e7e\u015fitli tarzlarda yap\u0131labilir. O, her bir kimseye ihtiya\u00e7 duyan Akl\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde (epiphanie<\/em>), her bir ki\u015finin pay\u0131d\u0131r. Hi\u00e7bir okuma, hakiki kitab\u0131n \u00e7ok \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131\u015f\u0131ml\u0131 (multivoque<\/em>) s\u0131rr\u0131n\u0131 veya gizemini da\u011f\u0131tmaz; ama her bir okumada, yazar\u0131n tasar\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bar\u0131nd\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 olanaklar\u0131n \u00f6tesinde, Yaz\u0131lan\u0131n say\u0131s\u0131z ve gelecek -veya eski- ya\u015famlar\u0131 filizlenmektedir. Sonuna kadar ak\u0131ll\u0131 olsa bile, yazar okur olarak kendili\u011findeli\u011fini g\u00f6zetler ve b\u00f6yle yakay\u0131 ele vermi\u015f anlamla yaz\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 \u015fimdiden b\u00fcker, o yaz\u0131s\u0131 ki esinli olmakla birlikte otomatik olmak gere\u011fini duymaz.<\/p>\n Blanchot’nun k\u0131sa ve \u015fimdiden eski bir metniyle ilgili olarak burada sunulan okuma, sanki bunlar sadece sembolik g\u00fc\u00e7leri i\u00e7in ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f\u00e7as\u0131na, metnin kurulu\u015funun baz\u0131 noktalar\u0131na de\u011finmektedir. K\u0131l\u0131 k\u0131rk yaran bilgi\u00e7lik ve \u015fiire ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k m\u0131? Kesinlikle. Ama, ku\u015fkusuz \u015fifresini \u00e7\u00f6zme i\u015fine rehberlik eden fikir reddedilse bile, bu durum ayn\u0131 zamanda bu yap\u0131t\u0131n olanakl\u0131 ya\u015famlar\u0131ndan biridir. \u015eiirin indirgenemez -esinli- egzotizminin,\u00a0as\u0131l anlam\u0131yla<\/em> s\u00f6ylemeye, temala\u015ft\u0131ran s\u00f6ylemeye ba\u015fvurdu\u011fu \u015feklindeki fikir, sergiledi\u011fi gizemi bozmamak i\u00e7in s\u00f6yledi\u011finin tersini s\u00f6ylemek zorunda olsa da. (1)<\/p>\n Blanchot’dan bahsetmek kolay de\u011fildir. \u015eu son y\u0131llarda ona ayr\u0131lm\u0131\u015f en iyi sayfalar, bereket versin ki -burada bizim de yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z gibi- bir \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f\u0131 veya bir Blanchot’yu “kendisinin kendini anlad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan daha iyi” anlama iddias\u0131ndan uzakt\u0131r. Fran\u00e7ois Collin, Blanchot’nun, ele\u015ftirel eserlerinin \u00f6tesine uzanan yaz\u0131nsal uzam i\u00e7inde, \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f felsefeden \u00f6d\u00fcn\u00e7 al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f baz\u0131 yararl\u0131 ilk ad\u0131mlar\u0131 atm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r ve Philippe Boyer de g\u00fcncel yaz\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7\u0131kard\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00fcr\u00fclt\u00fcler yoluyla onu, sessizliklerinin yank\u0131lar\u0131 olarak kavran\u0131l\u0131r k\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. (2) Roger Laporte, parlak ve dokunakl\u0131 bir metinde, t\u00fcm eserlerine \u015f\u00f6yle bir g\u00f6z atar ve, ona has bir tarzda, Blanchot’dan bahsetmenin imkans\u0131z oldu\u011funu anlatarak Blanchot’dan bahseder. Bernard Noel, kendi ya\u015fam\u0131nda, kendisine neredeyse \u00f6l\u00fcmc\u00fcl bir \u015fekilde \u00e7arpan bir canavar gibi, Blanchot’nun\u00a0\u00d6l\u00fcm H\u00fckm\u00fc<\/em>‘ne (3) \u00e7arpm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yarat\u0131kbi\u00e7im, [Teratomorphie<\/em>] muhtemelen, kendisi uyar\u0131nca, hayvan ya\u015fam\u0131n\u0131n evrimi i\u00e7inde, insan\u0131 da kapsayan yeni t\u00fcrlerin olu\u015fmas\u0131na kadar varan mutasyonlar\u0131n ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 kipliktir. (4) Ve Pierre Madaule, Blanchot’nun \u015fiirsel yap\u0131t\u0131n\u0131 kendi \u015fiirinin fabl\u0131na sokmu\u015ftur. (5) Hi\u00e7bir kimse onun fig\u00fcrlerini patavats\u0131zca sorgulamak i\u00e7in ve sanki onlar\u0131n \u015fiirini d\u00fcz yaz\u0131ya terc\u00fcme etmek \u00fczere bir \u015fifrenin onlara uygulanmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnm\u00fc\u015f\u00e7esine, Blanchot’nun \u015fiirsel metnine dokunmak istememi\u015f, b\u00f6yle bir kendini be\u011fenmi\u015flik \u00f6n\u00fcnde, b\u00f6yle bir kutsall\u0131k \u00e7i\u011fneme (profanisation<\/em>) ya da ihanet \u00f6n\u00fcnde geri \u00e7ekilmi\u015flerdir. Her ne kadar, sonradan, kirli ellerin yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu i\u015f unutulsa ve bu yaz\u0131ya anlamlayans\u0131z anlaml\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, yani m\u00fczikalitesi i\u00e7inde yakla\u015fmay\u0131 yeniden m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131lsa da, -dilin harc\u0131n\u0131 bi\u00e7imlendiren bir sanat s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011fundan- b\u00f6yle bir giri\u015fimin, at\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 t\u00fcm tehlikelere ra\u011fmen, her t\u00fcrden ba\u015fka giri\u015f\/n\u00fcfuz i\u00e7in zorunlu [bir] ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 al\u0131\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 yine de kesin midir? Tek ba\u015f\u0131na g\u00f6revin g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, burada k\u0131sa ve \u00f6zl\u00fc bir metnin se\u00e7ilmesini a\u00e7\u0131klar. Ama Blanchot’nun t\u00fcm yap\u0131tlar\u0131 gibi, muhtemelen bu da, kendili\u011finden insani olanda kurulan\u00a0varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n kapal\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/em>n\u0131n “fabl”\u0131d\u0131r: bo\u011fulma, ama bitimsiz bir can \u00e7eki\u015fme i\u00e7inde. \u00d6rne\u011fin\u00a0Aminadab<\/em> veya\u00a0Y\u00fcceler Y\u00fccesi\u00a0<\/em>(6) kadar karma\u015f\u0131k yap\u0131tlar\u0131n \u015fiirine dokunmak i\u00e7in, hat\u0131r\u0131 say\u0131l\u0131r, belki de \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz entelekt\u00fcel kaynaklar gerekli olacakt\u0131r. Burada yararland\u0131klar\u0131m\u0131z hangileri olursa olsun, yorumun kar\u015f\u0131 koyulmaz ba\u015ftan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131c\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, okuyucu i\u00e7in,\u00a0kapal\u0131l\u0131k<\/em> hakk\u0131ndaki bu metnin ilham edilmi\u015f oldu\u011funu, \u0130mge’nin ve Harf’in\u00a0ba\u015fka<\/em>s\u0131n\u0131n, orada, S\u00f6ylenenin ayn\u0131<\/em>s\u0131n\u0131 uyanma ve ay\u0131lma kipli\u011fine g\u00f6re par\u00e7alad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bu yaz\u0131n\u0131n Kitap oldu\u011funu onaylar.<\/p>\n Bu \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde, yorum \u015fimdiden ondan sapar ve, zaman zaman, Kitab\u0131 yorumlayan ki\u015fiyi Yazardan ay\u0131ran (separer<\/em>) ayr\u0131m (diff\u00e9rance<\/em>) i\u00e7inde nefes alma olana\u011f\u0131 bulur.<\/p>\n ”<\/p>\n (1) Bkz. Bizim yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z Autrement qu’etre<\/em>, s. 53 ve\u00a0De l’Existance a l’existans<\/em> s. 83 vd., ayr\u0131ca bkz. << La Realite et son ombre >> in [sic] Temps Modernes, kas\u0131m 1948.<\/span> Emmanuel Levinas, Maurice Blanchot \u00dcst\u00fcne, \u00e7ev. Kudret Aras, Monokl Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, 2011 [1975], s. 79-84.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\n(2) Fran\u00e7oise Collin:\u00a0Maurice Blanchot et la Question de l’Ecriture<\/em> (Gallimard). Philippe Boyer:\u00a0L’ecarte\u00e9(e)<\/em> (Seghers et Laffont)<\/span>
\n(3) Maurice Blanchot,\u00a0\u00d6l\u00fcm H\u00fckm\u00fc<\/em>, Kabalc\u0131, 1999, \u00e7ev. Arzu Dalg\u0131\u00e7 Ayd\u0131n, Berna K\u0131l\u0131n\u00e7er [L’Arret de Mort<\/em>, Gallimard, 1948, ed.n.].<\/span>
\n(4) Roger Laporte et Bernard\u00a0No\u00ebl: Deux Lectures de Maurice Blanchot<\/em> (Fata Morgana, Montpellier).<\/span>
\n(5) Pierre Madaule:\u00a0Une tache serieuse?<\/em> (Gallimard).<\/span>
\n(6) Maurice Blanchot,\u00a0Y\u00fcceler Y\u00fccesi<\/em>, Kabalc\u0131, 2008, \u00e7ev. \u0130smail Yerguz [le Tr\u00e8s Haut<\/em>, Gallimard, 1948, ed.n.].<\/span><\/p>\n